Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?! (Read 13767 times)
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4939
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #10 - 12/30/13 at 17:55:09
Post Tools
I believe you're referring to something that was on the ChessBase website, involved IM Vasik Rajlich, and was an April Fool prank.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
eggman
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 13
Location: USA
Joined: 12/30/13
Gender: Male
Re: C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #9 - 12/30/13 at 17:47:19
Post Tools
Howdy,

I seem to recall an article in Chess Life wherein a Polish computer expert (and expert or master strength Chess player) devised a special algorithim to analyze the King's Gambit.

The results were surprising: The only line where White can draw against "best" play was the 3.Be2 line! I doubt these results mean much for the typical club level player, but wanted to post this. Good luck!
  

May the wind at your back never be your own!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #8 - 11/02/11 at 12:48:11
Post Tools
Quote:
3...f5 is good for Black, since White deprived herself of Qh5.


Who's she?

Igor Ignatiev was a man, as far as I can tell.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
zoo
Ex Member


Re: C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #7 - 11/02/11 at 11:55:29
Post Tools
3...f5 is good for Black, since White deprived herself of Qh5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10758
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #6 - 11/02/11 at 03:30:45
Post Tools
Schwebbz wrote on 11/01/11 at 17:01:35:
I'll leave it as an open question: Does any of this look okay for White?

No. White can improve thought with (5...Bd6) 6.O-O iso 6.c4 at once: 6.O-O O-O 7.c4 c6 8.dxc6 (indeed) Nxc6 9.d4. As White's strategy has succeeded - giving up the f-pawn to gain central control - I think White is better.

I don't really understand your lines with 5...Nxd5. To me more logical seems 6.O-O (6.c4 Nb4 or Ne7 heading for g6) Bd6 7.c4 and 8.d4 unclear. White has fine central control again, but is now a pawn down.
6...g5 7.c4 (White sticks to the normal plan) Nb4 8.d4 Bf5 9.Nc3 Nc2 10.Nxg5! is (close to) winning).
6...h6 7.d4 (7.c4 doesn't work very well now because of Ne7 8.d4 g5 and I could not find an effective way to undermine Black's pawn chain) Bd6 8.c4 Ne3 9.Bxe3 fxe3 10.c5 Bf4 11.Nc3 O-O 12.Qd3 Re8 13.d5 with fine compensation for the pawn. The move 6...h6 isn't very useful here.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schwebbz
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 26
Joined: 12/19/10
Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #5 - 11/01/11 at 17:01:35
Post Tools
There's a lot to latch on to here; 
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?! d5 
(3...f5!, as suggested by TN, is better. I'll get back to that.)
4.exd5 Nf6 
(4...c6 may be more precise, e.g. 5.Nc3 Bd6 6. Nf3 Nf6 7.dxc6 Nxc6 8.O-O O-O 9.d4 Re1 or 5...Qh4+ 6.Kf1 Bd6 7.Ne4 Qd8 8.Nxd6 Qxd6 9.Bg4 Ne7 both seem to offer black an appreciable edge.) 
5.Nf3 Bd6
(5...Nxd5 6.O-O h6 (6...g5 7.Re1 c6 8.Nc3 Be6 9.d4 Be7 10.Bd3 Nc7 11.Qe2 Nd7) 7.Nc3 (7.d4 g5 8.Re1 Be7 9.Nc3 c6 10.Bd3 O-O 11.Nxd5 cxd5) 7...Nxc3 8.bxc3 Bd6 9.Bb5+ Nd7 10.Re1+ Kf8 11.c4 may be a little better than the game.)
6.c4 c6 7.d4?!
(Liquidating the doubled pawn by 7.dxc6 Nxc6 seems like a must, and well worth the tempo black gets in exchange.)
7...cxd5 8.c5
(in view of what comes after 9.b4?!, 8.O-O may be a slightly better idea.)
8...Bc7 9.b4? 
(I just don't see the point of this move; trying to create activity on the queenside is too slow. 9.Ne5 g5 10.Nc3 Nc6 11.Bb5 Qe7 looks like a better try, though White is probably still objectively lost.)
9...O-O 10.O-O (10.b5 b6 11.O-O bxc5 12.dxc5 Qe7 13.Bb2 Qxc5 14.Kh1 Nbd7 15.Ba3) 10...a6 11.Ne5 (11.Qb3 Re8 12.Nc3 h6; 11.Nc3 Nc6 12.Qb3 Bf5 13.a4 Be4 14.Rd1 Qe7) 11...g5 12.Nc3 Nc6 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.a4 Bf5

I'll leave it as an open question: Does any of this look okay for White?

Quote:
TN wrote on 01/09/10 at 06:10:40:
This 3.Be2 move, known as the 'Lesser Bishop's Gambit', just looks bad after 3...f5!? 4.ef5 Qh4 5.Kf1 d5, such as in Thoeng-Hector, Antwerp op 1994.


4.exf5? is bad. According to Keres White is doing well after 4.e5 d6 5.d4 dxe5 6.dxe5 Qh4+ 7.Kf1 Bc5 8.Qe1 Qxe1 9.Kxe1 Be3 10.Nc3 or 5...Qh4+ 6.Kf1 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qh6 8.Nc3. I studied these lines 25 years ago and back then I finally agreed with Keres and liked White's position. 

   
While 4.e5 is more tenacious than 4.exf5, I'm far from convinced it's enough to overturn the verdict on 3...f5!
After 4.e5 d6 5.d4 dxe5 6.dxe5 Qxd1+ 7.Bxd1 the isolani on e5 appears very weak. 7...Bd7 8.Bxf4 Nc6 9.Nh3 Nge7 10.O-O Nd5 11.Nc3 Nxc3 12.bxc3 and we're nearing an endgame where white has two weaknesses. This should be won for black.
6...Qh4+ 7.Kf1 Bc5 8.Qe1 is also less than satisfactory for White. Consider 8...Qh6 9.Nc3 (or 9.h4 Nc6 10.Nh3 Be3) 9...Be6 10.Nh3 g5 11.Na4 Nd7 12.Nxc5 Nxc5 13.Nf2 Ne4 14.Kg1 O-O-O 15.h4, for example.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #4 - 01/09/10 at 21:52:27
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/09/10 at 02:35:56:
Dude, 1981 is so pre-Internet era! There must be plenty of games in databases with this line.


The point being what, Lev?  Why don't you respond to the post, which was about a chess position?  And not everyone may appreciate being referred to as "Dude," you know?   

I shouldn't have to spend as much time as I do watching you for misbehavior, Lev.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Hehmer
Ex Member


Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #3 - 01/09/10 at 10:04:12
Post Tools
TN wrote on 01/09/10 at 06:10:40:
This 3.Be2 move, known as the 'Lesser Bishop's Gambit', just looks bad after 3...f5!? 4.ef5 Qh4 5.Kf1 d5, such as in Thoeng-Hector, Antwerp op 1994.


4.exf5? is bad. According to Keres White is doing well after 4.e5 d6 5.d4 dxe5 6.dxe5 Qh4+ 7.Kf1 Bc5 8.Qe1 Qxe1 9.Kxe1 Be3 10.Nc3 or 5...Qh4+ 6.Kf1 Nc6 7.Nf3 Qh6 8.Nc3. I studied these lines 25 years ago and back then I finally agreed with Keres and liked White's position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TN
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 3420
Joined: 11/07/08
Gender: Male
Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #2 - 01/09/10 at 06:10:40
Post Tools
Quote:
Can anyone help me with the score of the game Ignatiev - Freidin, 1962 (according to Korchnoj) or 1972 (according to Estrin)?

Both Korchnoi (ECO 1981) and Estrin (Das angenommene Königsgambit 1982) quote the game up to move 9: 

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.c4 c6 7.d4 cxd5 8.c5 Bc7 9.b4 

Now Korchnoi says that White has sufficient compensation and Estrin even sees an advantage for White. 

These assessments seem wrong. White's position looks much better than it is. I found 4 other games with this position in which White got slaughtered without a wisper but I'm interested in the game Ignatiev - Freidin anyway.



It's worth mentioning that the position after 5.Nf3 more commonly occurs via. 3.Nf3 d5 4.ed5 Nf6 5.Be2?!. 

This 3.Be2 move, known as the 'Lesser Bishop's Gambit', just looks bad after 3...f5!? 4.ef5 Qh4 5.Kf1 d5, such as in Thoeng-Hector, Antwerp op 1994.
  

All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1396
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
Reply #1 - 01/09/10 at 02:35:56
Post Tools
Dude, 1981 is so pre-Internet era! There must be plenty of games in databases with this line.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Hehmer
Ex Member


C33: Kingsgambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2?!
12/27/09 at 14:08:56
Post Tools
Can anyone help me with the score of the game Ignatiev - Freidin, 1962 (according to Korchnoj) or 1972 (according to Estrin)?

Both Korchnoi (ECO 1981) and Estrin (Das angenommene Königsgambit 1982) quote the game up to move 9: 

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.c4 c6 7.d4 cxd5 8.c5 Bc7 9.b4 

Now Korchnoi says that White has sufficient compensation and Estrin even sees an advantage for White. 

These assessments seem wrong. White's position looks much better than it is. I found 4 other games with this position in which White got slaughtered without a wisper but I'm interested in the game Ignatiev - Freidin anyway.

« Last Edit: 11/01/11 at 18:49:00 by Smyslov_Fan »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo